Thanks to Philipp for a pointer this interesting toolbar. It lets you create up or down site rankings on the fly and mixes in community filtering. Another example of using search and the web as a platform….and it even has a Mac version….
Re-reading Simson's wonderful rant tonight (in Tech Review, he gives a good overview of why the broadcast flag is evil), I got to thinking about Mike Ramsay, TiVo, and the possibilities of net-based television. As I posted earlier, Mike said that one of his goals with TiVo is to make…
I'm not sure I buy this, but I really like Mike Ramsay, and I sure love my TiVo….We can dream……
Desktop search (ie searching your own hard drive) is one of those things that seems to have gotten worse in the past ten years (why Yahoo, MSFT or Google don't do it is a mystery, imagine the goodwill…). Back in 1987, I had a great utility (why do I think…
While the column format would not allow a full discussion, I was thinking about blogs and social networking sofware while composing this piece. The focus is on "influencers" and marketing for this column, which by the way is the last of this kind. Next month I'm switching to an interview…
While the column format would not allow a full discussion, I was thinking about blogs and social networking sofware while composing this piece. The focus is on “influencers” and marketing for this column, which by the way is the last of this kind. Next month I’m switching to an interview format (first up is Tivo’s Mike Ramsay…)
The Net of Influence
Influencers are critical to business success. But the last thing you want to do is treat them like a mass market. Instead, do the hard work of cultivating them in a personal network.
By John Battelle, March 2004 Issue
The era of carpet-bombing your brand into existence through a shock-and-awe network TV campaign is over. So what now? Marketers struggling for meaning in a post-mass-media world are turning to the concept of “influencers” — people in a position to shape others’ opinions. Get them to give your product great word of mouth, the theory goes, and your business will flourish.
Push a bit on this particular noodle, though, and it feels all wet. According to The Influentials, a 2003 book from market researchers Jon Berry and Ed Keller, you can target a cohesive set of influencers — 21 million strong — as a single group.
But the idea that one large überclass of community leaders determines the fate of all products seems utterly silly to me. So allow me to posit a different approach: For any product you’re selling, there is a unique set of roughly 150 such leaders, each of whom you can and should get to know personally.
Hard to believe? Paul Rand is developing proof. Rand, an executive at Ketchum Communications, is launching a program to identify the folks critical to a business’s success and target them with intimate and relevant programs and messaging. What Rand has found, time after time, is that the number of influencers for any given product is about 150.
This reminded me of a concept advanced in Malcolm Gladwell’s The Tipping Point. We tend to max out social networks at about 150 individuals (it has to do with group dynamics and how our brains are wired). Below that number, a group is small enough to operate on personal relationships rather than rules and hierarchy. This rings true for villages, military units, corporate divisions, and, I’d argue, communities of interest. A smart marketer will capitalize on that fact.
(more in extended entry below)
Ask is buying the company which owns Excite, along with iWon and a few other sites. Ask Jeeves Inc. will buy the privately owned Interactive Search Holdings Inc. (ISH) for about $343 million in a move that the Emeryville, California, company expects will double its search market share, it announced…
Ask Jeeves Inc. will buy the privately owned Interactive Search Holdings Inc. (ISH) for about $343 million in a move that the Emeryville, California, company expects will double its search market share, it announced Thursday.
Very interesting….Ask will have 7% share if the deal goes through…Read More
This sure feels familiar. Owners of large database businesses, who have been coining cash for decades based on the model of aggregating freely available information, then monopolizing access to and distribution of that information, have finally realized that their business is imperiled by search engines and the web. So they're…
In essence, a bill winding its way through the House (HR3261) would redefine databases in such a way as to extend the owners of those databases far more power over how information could be used. This is a very bad thing. It’s part of the same creeping copyright chill driven by the MPAA and RIAA. This time, it’s Reed Elsevier and Westlaw, et al. Instead of figuring out new distribution and business models, these old line businesses are forcing Congress to do their bidding so they can sue their way into continued existence. It’s depressing, but it’s not surprising. From the story:
Imagine doing a Google search for a phone number, weather report or sports score. The results page would be filled with links to various sources of information. But what if someone typed in keywords and no results came back?
In Search Engine Watch today, a personal tale of how a memorial website was defaced by spambots posting PageRank-gaming comments….
OK, now I really have taken a shine to Google Director of Technology Craig Silverstein. I always liked him, what with his oft-repeated quip that search engines ought to be like the computer on Star Trek, but in a SES speech this morning, apparently in a bid to outdo himself,…
These search pets would not necessarily be like a pet dog, but more like “a genetically engineered beast.”
Adding to the science fiction, he believes search pets will be able to understand emotions and allow people to search for things that aren’t necessarily facts. For example, searchers can ask search pets, “What did Bob mean when he said that?”Read More
This time it's analyst Charlene Li, whose commentary runs on CNET today. In the piece she gives a fine overview of Google's weaknesses vis-a-vis MSN, Yahoo, and presumably AOL. Her overview is good, but I disagree with some of her conclusions. In summary, she argues that Google can't compete with…
In summary, she argues that Google can’t compete with the portals search offerings, in particular once the portals have integrated search across their sites. Portals, Li argues, are in the best position to incorporate personalization, contextual searching (ie a search for “price delta” within Yahoo Travel yields different results from the same search within Yahoo Finance) and the like. Li further points out that when MSFT integrates search into the desktop qua Windows, Google will really be hard pressed to compete.
Li concludes that Google’s only true advantage lies in its independence as a non-publisher: In a choice between Yahoo, which competes at multiple levels with publishers, or Google, which is focused solely on search, publishers have and will continue to sign up with Google in droves. As contextual marketing makes inroads, Google will evolve its ad network into utilities that will enable the contextual placement of display ads–and siphon a portion of traditional branding ad dollars away from the portals.Read More